Document jByQe9KdVbZ6Eo4vbMkvN5xRZ

DATE: May 4, 1987 TO: Linda Loreth from: L.B. Maclin SUBJECT: ASBESTOS TESTING ON PACKING PRODUCTS oven wo years or worlo wtoe scryici Q A. W. Chesterton Co. D Chesterton International, Inc Summary As you are aware, on June 20, 1986 The Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA) published its final rule on Occupational Exposure to Asbestos. This revised standard dropped the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for 8-hour employee exposure for asbestos, tremilite, anthrophyllite, and actinolite ,to a level of 0.2 fiber/cc, (with 0.1 fiber/cc as the new action limit). This required product retesting on our part for our products, because of the disclaimer we make on our Material Safety Data Sheets. The purpose of this evaluation was to monitor the cutting, installation, and removal of asbeszes containing packing materials. Discussion 1. All the samples tested were well below the OSHA PEL. The samples obtained for 9 styles of packing indicates levels of <0.04-<0.06 fibers/cc of asbestos. 2. It should be noted that these tests were done under ideal conditions, with packing being installed according to Chesterton procedures, (packing done by Steve Flanagan), which may not be the case in the field. Also, the material which was used was relatively new and intact; thus, the likelihood of generating airborne fibers of asbeszos was low. 3. As the results clearly show, our disclaimer is a true statement as far as our testing demonstrates. Test Conditions 1. Samples were teszec by NIGSH Method #235, using Millipcre MAWP037A0. pore size 0.8u, with DuPont Alpha-1 pumps set at flow rates of - ie50 cc/mir. or Niosh 7400~, using Millipore . MRWP025AC, pore size i.2u using same pumps. 2. Samples were taken for 60 min., and approximately 1-6 installations and removals wo^o done in that time for each style. 3. Engineering Samples were run approximately 6" away from the valve being packed. Personnel samples were run in conjunction with the engineering samples. MIOOLESEX INDUSTRIAL PARK - ROUTE 93. STONEHAM. MASS. 02180 U. S. A. (Please confine each letter to one subject! 4. Lacn packing macerial was cut to length, installed in tne appropriate equipment, brought up to normal operating conditions, and then removed. 5. Analysis of samples was done by Galson Technical Services, Inc. by phase contrast microscopy. Test Results NIOSH No. i39 i 239 239 239 239 239 239 239 7400 7400 7400 7400 7400 7400 7400 7400 7400 Sample No. T-l T-2 T-3 T-4 T-5 T-6 T-7 T-8 T-12 T-13 T-14 T-15 T-17 T-18 T-19 T-20 T-2I Style Pkinq Personnel/ Fibers/ Encineerino cc 1715 1715 322 322 320 320 1000 1000 P <0.06 E <0.06 P <0.06 E <0.06 P <0.06 E <0.06 P <0.06 E <0.06 1500 1500 326 326 Ambient Air 5010 5010 330 330 P E P E E P E P E <0.04 <0.18* <0.04 '<0.04 <0.03 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Sampling Int/ Time Remov 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 60 min. 15 min. 60 min. 60 min. 90 min. 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 60 min. 6 2 5 5 -- 7 7 6 6 OS HA PEL (Legal Limit) 0.2 .ACGIE: (American Conference of Governmental Industrial Kvcieni sts Chrysolite A Amcsite 2 0.2 0.5 * Due to low sampling time. References Threshold Limit Values anc Biolocical Exposure Indices for 1986-1987 American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists ~ Federal Recister Vol. 51, No. 119, Friday, June 20, 1986 22612-22790 NIOSH MANUAL of Analytical Methods, Method 7400, Issued 2/15/84, Revised 5/15/85 Chesterton Environmental Log #1, Winchester 1,2 MU. 3>U* LBM/das Lawrence B. MagijLn, CSM cc A.W. Chesterton,.J. Gaucher, C. Howe C. Moreno, K. O'Brien, G. Smith